Disposed

Rabindra Narayan Kundu v. Arabinda Das and Anr.

Calcutta HC8 Mar 2022CO/380/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order disposed of a revisional application under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India filed by Rabindra Narayan Kundu seeking expeditious disposal of an ARC Case. The court dispensed with service of notice on opposite parties and directed the Additional Rent Controller to dispose of the case within three months without adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Additional Rent Controller to dispose of ARC Case No. 147/08 within three months without adjournments.

Rabindra Narayan Kundu Vs Arabinda Das and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

08.03.2022 Ct. 21 D/L 134 ab

¶2

C.O. 380 of 2022

¶3

Rabindra Narayan Kundu

¶4

-Vs- Arabinda Das & Anr.

¶5

Mr. Debjit Mukherjee, Ms. S. Chatterjee, Ms. D. Ganguly, Mr. K. Bhattacharjee,

¶6

Mr. Debjit Mukherjee, learned advocate appears for the petitioner.

¶7

Record shows that the notice of this application has not been served on the opposite parties.

¶8

The petitioner by filing the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has prayed for expeditious disposal of ARC Case No. 147/08 (ARC Case No. 147/17/08), pending before the learned Additional Rent Controller, Kolkata.

¶9

The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the learned Court below has been granting unnecessary adjournments and due to which, there is a delay in disposal of the case and such delay is causing hardship to the petitioner.

¶10

Having regard to the nature of relief claimed by the petitioner, being a prayer for expeditious disposal of the ARC Case No. 147/08 (ARC Case No. 147/17/08), I do not find any need to serve notice of the present application on the opposite parties and it is not likely to cause any prejudice to the interest of the opposite

¶11

¶12

parties. Therefore, service of notice upon the opposite parties is dispensed with.

¶13

The learned Additional Rent Controller, Kolkata is requested to dispose of ARC Case No. 147/08 (ARC Case No. 147/17/08), as expeditiously as possible and positively within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order, without granting any adjournment whatsoever to any of the parties.

¶14

Accordingly, the revisional application being C.O. 380 of 2022 is disposed of.

¶15

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶16

Parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶17

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of all formalities.

¶18

( Kesang Doma Bhutia, J .)

Rabindra Narayan Kundu v. Arabinda Das and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rabindra Narayan Kundu v. Arabinda Das and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Profulla Kumar Ghosh Vs Joydip Das

Indian Bank Vs Cjj Infraprojects

Sambuddha Bhattacharya Vs Manali Bhattacharya

Aarti Tiwari Vs M/S. Treekal Construction Co. and Ors.

Smt Illa Basu and Ors. Vs Subir Ganguly

Tasmith Jewellers Vs Voylla Fashions Pvt. Ltd.